We do not have a lot of deprecated routes as of now as we focused on routes that are more used first.
I know on a lot of the remaining rewrites there has been discussion on the matching Github issues on potential deprecation (I cannot think of the exact count but enough to warrant this email __) It is key to note that I am not arguing for removal of endpoints within the current API version but if there is an endpoint we agree should be deprecated going forward to put a message within the response and on the docs. And thanks for the input sounds like you are +1 on rewriting all routes to Golang as Brennan is. On 11/12/19, 9:06 AM, "Robert O Butts" <[email protected]> wrote: Whether we rewrite a route in Go is an implementation detail. To the interface, to users, it doesn't matter whether a route is rewritten or not. But our API follows Semantic Versioning, in order to not break users. We can't just remove endpoints that some of us don't use, and assume other people don't, maybe people who never speak up on the mailing list. We'll never gain a big userbase if we keep breaking users. Per the _project_ SemVer, once we have API 2.0, we can deprecate API 1.x, and in the next major _project_ release, remove API 1.x. Irrespective of Perl or Go. My big concern is, API 2.0 is a big project. How long has the rewrite to Go taken? Do we really believe designing and implementing a completely new API will be any less time? I don't want killing Perl to have to wait on that. I know it feels like a waste to rewrite routes that you don't use, and probably few people do. But that's the cost of a stable project. How many "deprecated" routes are there? If it comes down to taking the development time to rewrite them so we can kill Perl faster, or leaving Perl around, I vote we just do the work and kill Perl. >If we don't rewrite them, then Perl will last until API 2.0 has been designed, released and then *another full major release cycle*. That's way too long to have two codebases for the same component, IMO, especially since the rewrite is already 50% complete. +1 On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 8:54 AM ocket 8888 <[email protected]> wrote: > I vote that by and large we DO rewrite them, with exceptions for routes > that just plain don't work, even in Perl. Those are few, though. > > If we don't rewrite them, then Perl will last until API 2.0 has been > designed, released and then *another full major release cycle*. That's way > too long to have two codebases for the same component, IMO, especially > since the rewrite is already 50% complete. > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 8:43 AM Hoppal, Michael < > [email protected]> > wrote: > > > As the Traffic Ops API is being rewritten from Perl to Golang there has > > been several routes that have been deprecated and probably more to come. > > > > In the deprecation efforts I have seen two strategies: > > > > > > * The route IS NOT rewritten from Perl to Golang and a deprecation > > notice is added to the alert response in the Perl handler > > * The route IS rewritten from Perl to Golang and a deprecation notice > > is added to the alert response in the Golang handler > > > > I think we should have consistency in our approach and wanted to get > > people’s thoughts. > > > > I would vote that we do not rewrite a deprecated route from Perl to > Golang. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Michael > > >
